Kamal Haasan said he would wait for the judgement of the Madras High Court where the Tamil Nadu government moved swiftly to file an appeal against the interim relief given by the single judge

Chennai: Upset over the hurdles caused by the ban on the release of mega budget ‘Vishwaroopam’, an emotional Kamal Haasan on Wednesday said Tamil Nadu (TN) does not want him to stay in the state and he might seek a ‘secular’ place in the country or overseas, reports PTI.

“When MF Hussain can do it, Kamal Haasan will do it... I am fed up. I am an artiste. After that, I will have to seek a secular state for my stay... Secular state from Kashmir to Kerala, excluding Tamil Nadu... Tamil Nadu wants me out,” he said in a choked voice as the fate of the movie is still to be decided in the court.

The actor said he had pledged all his property to make the trilingual movie, estimated to have cost around Rs100 crore. He said he might lose his house because of the losses incurred by the delay in the release of the movie.

Haasan said he was still to get interim relief as the film shows were “started and stopped” by police today, who sought a physical copy of the single judge’s order passed last night, giving clearance of the film.

“...But I believe that along with my Muslim friends, I have been instrument in a political game. I don't know who is playing and not even hazarding the guess. The fact remains that my history has proven that I have been neither leaning to the left nor right but trying to maintain my position,” Haasan said.

He said he would wait for the judgement of the Madras High Court where the Tamil Nadu government today moved swiftly to file an appeal against the interim relief given by the single judge.

“Now I shall wait for the afternoon judgement but after this... I think I will have to see a secular state for me to stay in. I have nothing to lose. I might as well choose a place which would house an artiste like me.

“I will learn in another couple of days whether I will be able to find a secular state in India or not. I will find, hopefully, another country which is secular that might take me in,” Haasan said.

Clad in a black shirt, Haasan addressed reporters at his office, which was once the house where he grew up.

Making a jocular remark at the title "Universal Hero" that precedes his name in film title-cards, he said his brother Chandrahaasan, 18 years elder to him, had suggested he could go anywhere in the world, referring to his intentions of leaving Tamil Nadu.

On pledging all his property to make the movie, the national award winning actor said this was nothing new for him as he had bounced back from similar situations twice before.

“And I am sure that even if I may not have a house to stay in, I would still have homes to feed me,” he said in an apparent reference to his fans.

Holding that the court had placed priority on law and order against an individual's economic issues, he said he was “even prepared to lose my entire property” for peace.

He said he was particular that Muslims are given a fair space in his monitored welfare movement.

“I don't understand these things, and if I do, I would become a politician,” he said.

Reacting to the controversy surrounding the film, Leela Samson, chairperson of the Central Board of Film Certification, said that it was ‘unjustified’.

“This puts the entire film industry and the artistic creative spirit of Indian people under a strain. How will people express themselves freely? And he (Haasan) is not irresponsible. I have seen a lot of irresponsible film but this is not one. So I think it is absolutely unjustified,” Samson said.

Law Minister Ashwani Kumar said there are 'strong arguments on both sides' with regard to the suggestion for disqualification of candidates against whom charges have been framed in cases having minimum punishment of five years

New Delhi: The Verma panel's recommendation for disqualification of candidates against whom criminal charges have been framed has found little favour with Law Minister Ashwani Kumar who instead wants fast-tracking of such cases, preferably to be decided by a lower court within 18 months, reports PTI.

The Law Minister said he has had preliminary discussion with Chief Election Commissioner VS Sampath on the issue of electoral reforms and the Law Commission has been asked to submit "concrete suggestions" on the issue by April.

Kumar said the government would "vigorously take forward" the discussion with political parties to forge a broad political consensus and then bring in the requisite legislation where necessary.

Talking about the recommendation of Justice JS Verma Committee, he said there are "strong arguments on both sides" with regard to the suggestion for disqualification of candidates against whom charges have been framed in cases having minimum punishment of five years.

"Personally speaking, I believe we will have to address the dichotomy between the number of cases in which charges have been registered and the number of cases in which actual conviction has been possible," he told PTI in an interview.

He was asked whether a person should be debarred from contesting elections if charges are framed as recommended by the Verma Committee or the present law should apply under which a candidate can be prohibited from contesting only if convicted with minimum two years imprisonment.

User

Alert me when a new comment is posted

COMMENTS

M G WARRIER

4 years ago

There is urgency to fast track justice not only when sensational issues come up and media/popular protests highlight them. The immediate measures could include:

• Segregating cases which need to be decided within a year and taking them on a priority basis by the courts now in position.
• Leaving the remaining cases to new Special Courts to be put in place at all levels depending on the number of pending cases.
• Ensuring vacancies of judges are filled in time
• Making it compulsory for government and public sector organizations to expedite procedures where they are on either side of matters before courts. This is necessary as there is laxity on their side as cost and delay seldom affects the individuals who handle cases in government and public sector. This position is slowly creeping into big corporates also.
• Making necessary legislative changes to reduce procedural delays
• Simultaneous efforts to encourage concerned parties to settle issues out of court. This method would bear fruit where party on one side of the dispute is government or quasi-government organizations.
• Prioritize cases involving citizens in jails without trial, cases involving persons holding public office (including election petitions), cases involving bribery/corruption/evading tax or other dues to government where amount involved is substantial and last but not least, the cases where party on one side is a senior citizen or a woman with inadequate resources to fight a case in the court.

Vaibhav Dhoka

4 years ago

As of TODAY our judiciary is in dismal state.It cannot deliver timely justice.How can politicians cases be segregated from routine cases,do we as citizens suffer,for politicos who have left us NO WHERE.The need of hour is total JUDICIAL overhaul and accountability be fixed for judges.

nagesh kini

4 years ago

Though it may be required from the political perspective, what happens to the false charges filed against innocent citizens who have the sword hanging on their heads, how are they different from our neta-mantris-shentris-babus?
Why give preference to this corrupt lot over honest citizens?
This is highly discriminatory to say the least.